[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003091559220.12433@localhost>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:02:31 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: mm: Do not iterate over NR_CPUS in __zone_pcp_update()
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > > I'm having trouble working out whether we want to backport this into
> > > 2.6.33.x or earlier. Help?
> >
> > given the above aesthetic mod, shouldn't that same change be
> > applied to *all* explicit loops of that form? after all,
> > checkpatch.pl warns against it:
>
> The number of NR_CPUS should be significantly less after the percpu
> rework. Would you audit the kernel for NR_CPUS use?
i just did a simple grep for the obvious pattern:
$ grep -r "for.*NR_CPUS" *
arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
arch/sparc/kernel/traps_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
... etc etc ...
most of the occurrences are under arch/. as you say, after the
rework, most of those should be replaceable.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists